| 摘要: | 傳統零售通路日趨式微，連鎖通路商所擁有的通路力量越來越強，而供應商所處的地位越來越弱，供應商因擁有的核心能力不同，對連鎖通路所採取的因應方式亦有很大的不同。本研究之目的：1.探討食品供應商的核心能力 2.探討連鎖通路力量對食品供應商的影響 3.探討食品供應商的因應策略 4.探討食品供應商策略選擇與本身核心能力的關係。 本研究的性質屬於探索性研究，分成兩階段研究進行。第一階段研究以「深度訪談」收集資料。第二階段研究，以第一階段研究結果發展問卷，並以「問卷調查」進行資料收集。 本研究之實證結果為： 整體供應商優勢核心能力，包含品質聲譽、品牌知名度、通路的鋪貨能力、市場佔有率、產品售價高。核心能力大型供應商最高、中型供應商次之、小型供應商最低；而不同產品類之間的核心能力差異不明顯。 連鎖通路對整體供應商重大影響，包含壓縮傳統通路之銷售、貨架空間有限造成同業競爭更加激烈、要求上架費及退佣或贊助促銷活動、供應商產品可迅速鋪貨到全省各地、要求較低的進貨價格或較高的銷售毛利。不同規模供應商受連鎖通路力量之影響，中型供應商最大、小型供應商次之、大型供應商最小；而不同產品類之間受連鎖通路力量之影響差異不明顯。 整體供應商對連鎖通路重要因應方式，包含加強與連鎖通路商人際關係互動、加強內部改善降低成本、強化外部其他通路，減低或避開對連鎖零售商的依賴、開發多樣化產品上市以增加本身談判力量。整體供應商因應方式，採取的防禦策略平均數最高，迴避策略次之，配合策略再次之，競爭策略殿後。 本研究依據供應商核心能力，將供應商分成三個群組，分別為相對弱質供應商、相對均質供應商以及相對優質供應商。三大群組對防禦策略有顯著差異，其中以相對均質供應商明顯高於其他兩群組。 本研究依營業額分為小型供應商(年營業額小於2億元)、中型供應商(年營業額2億元~10億元)及大型供應商(年營業額大於10億元)。大型供應商相對的會採取較積極的競爭策略，而採取迴避以及防禦策略明顯較低；中、小型供應商相對的採取防禦策略高於大型供應商，中型供應商會採取迴避策略明顯高於大型供應商。 營業規模大小以及員工人數多寡，與核心能力群組有關，大型供應商以及員工人數在200人以上傾向屬於相對均優質供應商，而小型供應商以及員工人數在50人以上傾向屬於相對均弱質供應商，中型供應商以及員工人數在50~200人之間傾向屬於相對均質供應商。 Taiwan’s market channel has structure change in recent years. The traditional retail channel fall because of the newly retail channel rise. The chain retailer’s channel power become stronger so that supplier’s position getting difficulty. Base on supplier’s different core competence, they would take different action to deal with chain retailer. The purpose of this thesis is to find out: 1.the core competence of food supplier; 2. the chain channel’s power affecting to the food supplier; 3. food supplier’s fighting strategy; 4. the relationship between the core competence and strategy of food supplier. This is an exploratory research, will proceeding in two stages. First stage is to collect record via depth interview. The second stage is to develop the questionnaire base on the first stage’s result to get the data. The research result as shown on below: The overall advantage core competences of suppliers are: quality reputation, well-known brand, channel distributing capability, marketing share, high product price. The core competence raking is base of supplier’s size. The large size supplier is higher then middle size supplier and the small size supplier is the lowest one. There aren’t significant differences of core competence between different category suppliers. The chain channel’s power gets serious impact to the supplier which including squeezing the traditional sales channel, serious competition due to limit shelves, slotting allowances and sales incentive rebate or promotion expense require, efficient distribution ability, low cost and high profit requirement. The power of chain channel affecting different size suppliers, middle size supplier is higher than large size supplier and the small size supplier is the lowest one. There aren’t significant differences of channel power affect between different category suppliers. The overall strategies for supplier to deal with chain retailer are: enhance relationship with chain retailer, improve internal control and cost reduction, enhance other possible channels, enhance R& D ability, develop product category, strengthen negotiation ability. The overall strategies ranking are; defense strategy first then avoidance strategy, cooperation strategy third and competition strategy final. This research base on the core competence to separate suppliers in three groups, they are relatively disadvantaged group, intermediate group and relatively advantaged group. The defensive strategy is different between these three groups. The trend of intermediate group use defense strategy is higher then the other two groups. Contrast with the other two, the large size supplier would prefer to take competition strategy instead of avoidance strategy and defense strategy. The middle & small size supplier would take defense strategy. The avoidance strategy used to be taken by middle size supplier. Supplier’s scale and employee size are interrelated to the core competence groups. Employee number over 200 and large size supplier belongs to intermediate and relative advantaged group, employee number under 50 and small size supplier belongs to intermediate and relative disadvantaged groups, employee number between 50 – 200 and middle size supplier belongs to intermediate groups. |
